[Blueshirt1]

Basic issue I have is I used SACD and CD on my 'real' system and ripped CD's via iTunes .mp3 (44khz) on my 'I dont care about what I am listening to" system.  Problem was I became lazy and it was just easier to play from the mp3's then loading CD's. (Babies will do that to you).

Now I am looking at buying the Bryston BDP-1 and associated DAC so I can get the most out of my system and music.  This will allow me to play high rez music but in reality, I dont have any.

So therein lies the problem. Do I need to re-rip all of my CD's again using some of the suggestion in the sticky? Or can I up-convert them? I saw dBpoweramp has an option to convert existing files into 192khz. Am I kidding myself in thinking this is the best way to go or is it just the easiest while sacrificing quality?

Thanks in advance

[ted_b]

First off, this is not at all about hirez music, it;'s about ripping cd's.  Your best answers will come from the Discless Circle.  I will move this over there.

That being said,  if you want to hear cd's in their native 16/44.1 resolution (again, not hirez but not mp3 either!!) then rip them that way.  The mp3 cannot be upsampled and regain any music.  Think about it this way:  you had a full color photo that you copied in black and white.  Any improvements you make to that photo, regardless of copier quality, will still be black and white.  You've lost the color forever, so go back to the original photo and rip, er,  copy in color this time.

That is why MP3 is called lossy. You lost music information, never to be regained.  By the way, once you go back to the cd and rip correctly you will have a 16/44 file.  Do NOT upsample that file to 24/96 and expect hirez...it ain't.

[bdiament]

Hi Blueshirt1,

Basic issue I have is I used SACD and CD on my 'real' system and ripped CD's via iTunes .mp3 (44khz) on my 'I dont care about what I am listening to" system.  Problem was I became lazy and it was just easier to play from the mp3's then loading CD's. (Babies will do that to you).

Now I am looking at buying the Bryston BDP-1 and associated DAC so I can get the most out of my system and music.  This will allow me to play high rez music but in reality, I dont have any.

So therein lies the problem. Do I need to re-rip all of my CD's again using some of the suggestion in the sticky? Or can I up-convert them? I saw dBpoweramp has an option to convert existing files into 192khz. Am I kidding myself in thinking this is the best way to go or is it just the easiest while sacrificing quality?

Thanks in advance

Unfortunately, what has been ripped to mp3, as Ted pointed out, has already been ruined.

My suggestion is to re-rip everything to a linear PCM format like .aif. 

I would also keep all rips at the native rate of the source, avoiding any upsampling or any other processing.
(Converting a less than 192k file to 192 will not result in something that sounds remotely like real 192 and in many cases will actually degrade what you started with.)

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

[totoro]

AIF doesn't have meta data. There is no good technical reason to keep your data in AIF over FLAC. Rerip your data into flac, and spend some time getting the tags right. If you feel the need to convert it into some other format (including AIF) later, you can, and get the same data. This is provably true, as FLAC is actually lossless. Many players will use the metadata in your files to allow you to browse them (as will for example, sonos and squeezeboxserver (or whatever it's called now)).

It makes no sense at all to lose the ability to browse based on metadata. There are some arguments about whether decoding flac on the fly is bad. Even if these arguments were true (and I wouldn't necessarily grant that claim), it's pretty trivial to convert one cd at a time and listen to them, and your archival format has tags if you keep things in FLAC. Anyone claiming that somehow FLAC can't be converted back is simply incorrect: this is not just a matter of opinion but simple technical fact.

[srb]

AIF doesn't have meta data.

The simple technical fact here is that AIFF does allow metadata which is why many users convert from WAV to AIFF.  It's true that AIFF metadata is not read by some music player programs (foobar, MediaMonkey, Songbird and Windows Media Player come to mind) whereas FLAC does have wider compatability with players (except for iTunes).
 
My AIFF files have embedded metadata and are compatible between the programs that I use, J. River Media Center, iTunes and Audacity.
 
Steve

[bdiament]

Hi totoro,

AIF doesn't have meta data. There is no good technical reason to keep your data in AIF over FLAC. ...

Actually it is .wav that doesn't have metadata.  Some programs will allow it but the information will not stay with the file when the file is copied.  In contrast, .aif carries full metadata and the information does stay with the file.

Further, some folks (including myself and a good number of colleagues and fellow audiophiles with whom I've spoken) hear sonic degradation with the so-called "lossless" formats.  I much prefer .aif as the format for my music server.  It is also the format in which I record and master.

As always, I suggest folks listen for themselves and draw their own conclusions.

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

[Blueshirt1]

Thanks everyone, getting to understand better. Just ordered a 3T WD NAS to prepare for the fun.

I want to keep iTunes compatibility so I can still play music over Airmedia to the living room system so I guess AIFF would be the best way to go taking that into consideration?

[bdiament]

Hi Blueshirt1,

I like .aif because it does not require any addition process (such as the "unpacking" the "lossless" formats require).
Also, as I mentioned, it is the format in which I record and master -- records are made using linear PCM formats (like .aif and .wav) and not compressed formats. 

I sometimes use an Apple Airport Express to send music all around the house.  As long as the wireless distribution scheme can handle the format, there is no problem at all.

Have fun!

Best regards,
Barry
www.soundkeeperrecordings.com
www.barrydiamentaudio.com

[jtwrace]

You'll need a dac.  One of these would do you well.   

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=110698.0

[wilsynet]

I rip using Apple Lossless.  If it turns out you want FLAC or AIF later, there are conversion tools that do that for you without any bit loss.

I also use Audirvana, which has configurable memory buffer sizing.  If there's an audible difference between AIF and Apple Lossless, that would be very surprising given that the batch decoding should result in the same bits in the memory buffer, and the memory buffer is large enough to hold several songs at once.

Anyway, I'm sure opinion is divided on this one, I've just made a conscious choice to not make it a priority for me to solve.

[mark funk]

Looking for a DAC?


http://avahifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=266&Itemid=253